[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Sonu Ram @ Deoraj Ram @ Deoraj vs The State Of Bihar on 10 June, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12206 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-498 Year-2024 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Sonu Ram @ Deoraj Ram @ Deoraj S/o- Kapilmuni Ram Village- Barli P.S-
Karamchat Sabar District-Kaimur at Bhabhua
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Chhanmuni Devi W/o- Jay Prakash Dash Village- Pasaai PS- Belawo
District- Kaimur at Bhabua (Chakbandhi road,Bhabhua,ward no. 10)
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kiran Kumari Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi, APP
Mr. Pradhan Murli Manohar Pd, Advocate
Mr. Abhash, Advocate
Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 10-06-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Bhabhua P.S. Case
no.498 of 2024 registered under sections 366A and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that on his daughter disappearing, on inquiry being made it
transpired that the petitioner along with the assistance of others
had kidnapped her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The daughter
of the informant returned and her statement was recorded under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12206 of 2025(4) dt.10-06-2025
2/3
section 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein she has described her age to
be 17 years. It is submitted that actually the daughter of the
informant is a major and she has not supported the prosecution
case. The petitioner is in custody since 8.8.2024 and
charge-sheet has been submitted in the case. The petitioner has
no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
Learned counsel for the informant submits that not only the
petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but there is direct allegation
against him of having kidnapped the minor daughter of the
informant. The victim in her statement under section 164 of the
Cr.P.C. has categorically stated that she did not go out of her
own volition and wanted to go with the petitioner after
informing her parents.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in
the F.I.R., the material that has transpired in course of
investigation, the age of the daughter of the informant/victim
and the contents of her statement under section 164 of the
Cr.P.C. wherein she admits to being on friendly terms and
wanting to marry the petitioner to which her parents were not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12206 of 2025(4) dt.10-06-2025
3/3
agreeable, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Bhabhua P.S. Case no.498 of 2024, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned A.D.J VIth-cum-Special Court, Kaimur at Bhabhua.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link